Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jay Verkuilen" data-source="post: 7769176" data-attributes="member: 6873517">Both types can be really fun, especially when the game is built with mechanics that support that particular kind of play. For example, Star Trek Adventures (STA) by Modiphius is definitely a &quot;new school&quot; game in that it's really oriented around story. There's minimal PC advancement and it's also very team oriented---PCs are in Starfleet and under military orders! PCs can certainly die. It's not oriented around loot drops. A lot of the adventures end with the PCs having a partial or ambiguous success, just like the shows. I'm not sure I'd want to run an entire campaign of it, but it really does a good job of getting the feel of a Star Trek episode and it's a fantastic two or three session game. One reason it's so good at this is because it's got tools built in that enable the GM to control the pace in the form of the Threat mechanic, which reads weirdly but works well in play. (The <a href="https://www.modiphius.net/products/star-trek-adventures-quickstart-guide" target="_blank">quickstart </a>to STA is free and gives you a very good idea of how the game runs.) D&amp;D doesn't really have anything like that so if you want to run a game with the episodic and dramatic feel, you'd have to either (a) have a really good DM capable of making that happen or (b) run the risk of things feeling very railroaded. You're right, though, a table with markedly mixed preferences is very hard to GM for. The original post that lead to this entire thread is just full of empirically unhinged generalizations based on &quot;impressions&quot; not actual play, and it clearly shows.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jay Verkuilen, post: 7769176, member: 6873517"] Both types can be really fun, especially when the game is built with mechanics that support that particular kind of play. For example, [I]Star Trek Adventures[/I] (STA) by Modiphius is definitely a "new school" game in that it's really oriented around story. There's minimal PC advancement and it's also very team oriented---PCs are in Starfleet and under military orders! PCs can certainly die. It's not oriented around loot drops. A lot of the adventures end with the PCs having a partial or ambiguous success, just like the shows. I'm not sure I'd want to run an entire campaign of it, but it really does a good job of getting the feel of a [I]Star Trek [/I]episode and it's a fantastic two or three session game. One reason it's so good at this is because it's got tools built in that enable the GM to control the pace in the form of the Threat mechanic, which [I]reads[/I] weirdly but works well in play. (The [URL="https://www.modiphius.net/products/star-trek-adventures-quickstart-guide"]quickstart [/URL]to [I]STA[/I] is free and gives you a very good idea of how the game runs.) D&D doesn't really have anything like that so if you want to run a game with the episodic and dramatic feel, you'd have to either (a) have a [I]really[/I] good DM capable of making that happen or (b) run the risk of things feeling very railroaded. You're right, though, a table with markedly mixed preferences is very hard to GM for. The original post that lead to this entire thread is just full of empirically unhinged generalizations based on "impressions" not actual play, and it clearly shows. [/QUOTE]

Verification